Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Final text of JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass


Recommended Posts

I had a chance to really leaf through the book today.    Well over 500 footnotes. 

And the interview excerpts part is actually slightly longer than the annotated screenplay part.  That section is a real highlight.  The interview with Edwin McGehee is a gem.  But we decided not to deal with Clinton/Jackson. Which let us print almost his whole interview in the book.

I mean what a cast of interview subjects: Gary Aguilar, Cyril Wecht, John Newman, James Galbraith, Jeff Morley, Robert Kennedy Jr., Doug Horne, Dave Mantik, Donald Miller,  Jim Gochenaur, Henry Lee, John Tunheim, Robert Rakove, Philip Muehlenbeck, Brad Simpson, Lisa Pease, Richard Mahoney. And more.

Regarding the last five names, this is why I ended the text of the book like I did.

"It is the thesis of both films, and through a multitude of sources, that the meeting with Gullion in 1951 gave birth to an intellectual curiosity which attempted to solve a problem: How could America promote nationalism and decolonization in the Third World while competing with the Soviets on the Cold War stage?  Kennedy did his best to try and solve a dilemma which both his predecessor and successor all but ignored.  He was not allowed to work this way through to a permanent solution.  And his policy was not without faults when he was murdered.  But perhaps the best way to summarize his singular achievement is to paraphrase Richard Mahoney from his milestone book JFK: Ordeal in Africa:  His shortcomings derived from the contagion of the times, his virtues were his own."

Of the 448 pages, that is the paragraph I hope the reader remembers and takes to heart. Its the most important  message in the entire six hours; and its the one that most aptly speaks to today. I am really glad I wrote it.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, that was corrected Michael.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Summary: Litwin criticizes Jim for citing only one questionable source. Jim actually cites two sources. Litwin in the same article cites a passage from his own book that is sourced from only one person, who happens to be the most unreliable source imaginable on that particular topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...